2718!
Raymond Keene
At first glance the rating discrepancy between Gary Kasparov (2805) and Nigel Short (2655) appears to be so great as to make their forthcoming world cham- pionship contest a foregone conclusion. However, stats freaks should take heart from a suggestion made to me by Dominic Lawson, namely that Nigel only puts forth his full and genuine strength in his world championship cycle matches.
Accordingly, I have calculated Nigel's rating performance averaged out exclusive- ly over his four qualifying matches against Speelman, Gelfand, Karpov and Timman. The final Elo rating figure for Nigel of 2718 is considerably more encouraging and points to a far closer match than conven- tional rating figures would suggest.
On Monday 8 February at 12.00 noon Fide, the World Chess Federation, opened the sealed bids from competing cities for the Short-Kasparov match. There were only two bids. One, which might be termed a ludicrous joke, was of one million Swiss francs from Santiago de Compostella in Spain, whose city fathers appear to be caught in a 1970s time warp as far as world title prize funds are concerned. The other was a joint approach from Belgrade and Sofia of a world record 5.6 million US dollars. The problem here is that the host is the notorious Jezdimir Vasiljevic, whose Yugoskandic Bank funded the Fischer- Spassky match in Belgrade last year. The required bank guarantee for Fide is, of course, made on Vasiljevic's own bank. Fide cannot possibly countenance a match in Belgrade, while the international legal- ity of using Serbian funds to play in Sofia must also be open to doubt.
That Fide have now driven themselves into this ridiculous corner is solely the fault of their short-sighted and idiotic business managers. It is surely obvious that real interest would only come from the UK once it was known that Short had qualified to play Kasparov. This became certain on Saturday 30 January. At that point Man- chester made a feverish effort to get a bid together, but they were ultimately defe- ated by the ridiculous five-day deadline which Fide had imposed for submitting bids. It is to be hoped that Fide will now see sense, re-open the bidding and give, say, a two-month period for sensible spon- sors, fired up by Nigel's qualification, to submit bids that are acceptable both as to size and location and as to the legality of the source of the funding. Manchester still seems the best bet.
Nigel's classic match against Timman
furnished a plethora of fascinating play. This week, and continuing for some time, I shall return to games and positions
which merit deeper comments. First of all, game 4.
Short-Timman: Candidates Final, El Escorial, Game 4; Sicilian Defence.
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 NO Nc6 6 Bg5 e6 7 Qd2 Timman has used this line in the past and with Nigel's massive computer database at his fingertips for pre-match preparation it is certain that Short would have honed, his open- ings arsenal to be ready for this eventuality. 7 . . . Be7 80-0-0 0-0 9 f4 h6 10 Bh4 e5 11 Nf5 Bxf5 12 exf5 Qa5 13 Kbl Rfe8 14 Bc4 In the game Karpov — Timman, London 1982, the then world champion tried 14 g4, but without much success. The virtue of Black's position is its solidity. In fact, Karpov had to defend a difficult endgame to reach the haven of a draw. Short's move is new, but it involves the sacrifice of a pawn. 14 . . . Qb4 15 Bb3 Qxf4 16 Qxf4 exf4 17 Rhfl Nh5 White could now regain the pawn with 18 Bxe7 but after 18 . . Nxe7 19 Rxd6 Nxf5 20 Rd7 Re7 21 Rxe7 Nxe7 22 g4 Nf6 23 Rxf4 the game would certainly be drawn. A complicated alternative which we were analysing in the press room. and about which we formed no clear conclusion. is 18 Bxe7 Nxe7 19 Nb5!? Nxf5 20 g4 Ne3. 18 Bel Rad8 19 Nd5 Bg5 20 h4 Bf6 21 Nxf6+ Nxf6 22 Rxf4 Re2 23 g4 Continuing the theme of pawn sacrifice. 23 . . . Rg2 24 g5 hxg5 25 hxg5 RxgS Bh4 Rh5 27 a3 Kf8 28 Bc4 Ne7 29 Rdfl Rc8 Be2 Rh6 Timman has maintained his extra par but with White's two bishops in an open position Short is in very little danger of losing. PartlY tI bait the Dutch journalists in the press rout". was now predicting, without very much cone" tion, that Timman would overreach in his efforts to win and actually lose. 31 Bf2 Nc6 32 Rdl Ndi 33 b3 NdeS 34 f6 Rd8 35 fxg7+ Kxg7 36 6114 Rdh8 37 Bf2 Rg6 38 b4 Rh2 39 Rfl b6 39 . • • 36
Position after 41 Kb2
is stronger. 40 Bb5 Rh3 41 Kb2 (Diagram) Here' having just made the time control. Timlna71 should have played 41 . . . Ne7, meeting 421311d with the defensive manoeuvre . . Ng8. Instea in his haste to plant a knight on the aggressive square e6, Timman commits a horrible mistak; 41 . . . Nd8 42 BM Suddenly the truth dawne; on both Timman and his supporters in l',": commentary room (who outnumbered the n, glish contingent by about 5 to 1). Now Blae," must lose material in most unfortunate circuals,' ances. 42 . . Ne6 43 Bf6+ Rxf6 If 43 . . • IC,P or indeed any other king move, then 44 Bxe dxe5 45 Rxf7 leaves Black's pawns hard 04 defend and his king exposed. 44 Rxf6 Nd4 Bd3 d5 46 R6f4 NdO 47 Rdl Rh2 48 Ba6 (14,71 Rfl Rh3 50 Be2 Nd2 51 Rgl + Kh7 52 Kcl 1`40c, 53 Bxc4 Nxc4 Timman has done his best with O' poor weapons at his disposal but Short can Or vacuum his remaining pawns from the boalTi when further resistance becomes hopeless. Rxf7+ Kh6 55 Rxa7 Rc3 56 Ra8 Kh7 57 Rdl N 53 Rxd4 Rxc2+ 59 Kbl Rh2 Black resigns.
Previous page
